A nice improvement on that would be to have a rearchive_command to
allow to sync the new bytes written since a previous archive_command
(so
it needs a new placeholder start from this byte). This allows
writing
dd seek=%s skip=%s count=%b bs=1
But after a log switch nothing is filling that
Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
The probably useful next step would be to pass the current length to
the
archive_command,
so it can write the filled part of the file without the need for a
filter.
I can see that helping a lot, but not by writing onto the file on
disk.
If
Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am suggesting to add such a placeholder for the size of the filled
part of the log.
The archiver has not got that information, and can't compute it any
faster than the called command could.
regards, tom lane
Kevin Grittner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not quite as good. Since the archiver process can't actually deliver
this number in a lightweight manner, all it goes to show is that the
filter code compares reasonably well in performance with dd and cat.
I'd definitely vote for leaving it as a
The probably useful next step would be to pass the current length to
the
archive_command,
so it can write the filled part of the file without the need for a
filter.
I can see that helping a lot, but not by writing onto the file on
disk.
If the file is nearly empty, that would be a
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 9:38 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Kevin Grittner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 5:53 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Zeugswetter
Andreas ADI SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
archive_command=dd if=%p of=/backup/WAL/%f bs=1 count=%b
I think
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 5:53 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Zeugswetter
Andreas ADI SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you misunderstood what I meant.
The actual archive command is constructed by expanding certain
placeholders.
I am suggesting to add such a placeholder for the size of
Kevin Grittner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We should also document that this is designed to help compress files
that aren't full because we switched early because of archive_timeout.
Attached is a modified version to implement both of these. I also
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 08:31 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Kevin Grittner wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
We should also document that this is designed to help compress files
that aren't full because we switched early because of archive_timeout.
Attached is a modified version to implement both of these. I also
bailed
out if there was surplus input. I tried an optimization of
allocating a
separate buffer for outputting the zeros, to avoid repeated memset
calls.
It didn't seem to make a very big difference; do you think it's
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 10:17 +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote:
Attached is a modified version to implement both of these. I also
bailed
out if there was surplus input. I tried an optimization of
allocating a
separate buffer for outputting the zeros, to avoid repeated memset
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 3:17 AM, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Zeugswetter
Andreas ADI SD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The probably useful next step would be to pass the current length to the
archive_command,
so it can write the filled part of the file without the need for a
filter.
I can
Hannu Krosing [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is this apoc9009 guy real ?
Please, just don't respond.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
13 matches
Mail list logo
